Bob Hoatson's Letter to the National Review Board

Judge Michael Mertz, Chairperson
National Review Board
Office of Child and Youth Protection
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 Fourth St, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20017

Dear Judge Mertz and Members of the National Review Board:

As a priest, survivor of clergy sexual abuse, and advocate for hundreds of
survivors of clergy sexual abuse, I feel I must respond to your
recently-released

report to the Catholic Faithful of the United States regarding the
protection of children, teenagers, young adults, and vulnerable adults in
the American

Catholic Church. Unfortunately, I neither share your optimism nor agree
with your conclusions.

The overall tone of the report is of concern to me. There is no
acknowledgment of the "epidemic" of clergy sexual abuse that has been
exposed and

continues to be exposed to this day. The National Review Board was
established because the bishops of the country were incompetent to act
legally,

ethically, and morally toward those who were abused. My experience,
research, and immersion in the recoveries of survivors indicate that the
climate and

culture that created the problem in the beginning are still in place and
very much the prevailing practices. The Catholic bishops of the United
States, for the

most part, have never been held accountable for their illegal, immoral,
and unethical methods and practices.

It is understandable why you would be hesitant to confront your bosses.
Governor Frank Keating was "eliminated" as the first Chairperson of your
group, and

perhaps you fear the same response if you act wisely, independently, and
transparently. It is clear to me that you will never have the authority to
act as you

need to act.
As for the "diversity of the Board," which you noted in the second
paragraph of your report, there are no survivors or survivor-advocates on
the Board, there are

no "experts" in the field of clergy abuse survivors, such as Fr. Tom Doyle
or Dr. Richard Sipe, and there are no parents or family members of
survivors on the

Board. What do you mean by diversity; that there are men and women on the
Board? That does not equal diversity as it relates to the mission and
purpose

of the Board or the needs of survivors of clergy sexual abuse.

As for the accomplishments that you listed:


1) Safe environment programs are well and good. However, they do not
guarantee that bishops are not transferring criminal abusers around their
diocese and

inter-dioceses.

2) Diocesan procedures to respond promptly to allegations do not guarantee
that bishops treat survivors with care, compassion, and honesty. There
still is a

climate of secrecy, cover-up, and lack of transparency in diocesan
offices, especially that of the bishop.

3) Publishing reports of credible allegations is great, except it does
nothing for the vast majority of survivors who cannot report their abuse
because they have

had bad experiences with Church authorities, are too damaged to come
forward, or are thoroughly convinced (rightly so!) that the Church is
similar to a Mafia

-like organization that simply protects its own.

The Board has not reached out in any way, shape, or form to survivors to
ask them what they think, feel, and believe about the Church's attempts to
clean up

its act. Survivors' advocacy groups, such as Road to Recovery, Inc., SNAP,
and others are not included in your deliberations or those of the bishops.
As for the research projects that have been conducted or are currently
being conducted:

1) The current study, Causes and Contexts, has been carefully nuanced to
avoid an analysis of what needs to be known. It was made clear to me at a
Voice

of the Faithful Conference workshop that this study has eliminated the
most important focus groups: survivors, survivor families, and survivor
experts and

advocates. It also will not include a key group that can provide
invaluable information; namely, priest-survivors who have lived in the
seminary system, been

abused in the seminary or clerical system, and know the "inner workings of
the system."

2) It is clear to me that the Causes and Contexts study will not expose
the clerical culture and sexual dysfunctionalism of the seminary/rectory
system;

rather, it will skirt (again!) what has to be uncovered if the Church is
going to recover from its addiction to power, authority, sex, and
clericalism.

3) Please do not spend time on perpetuating the "pity party for priests."
You seem to want to give deference in research reports to priests who
covered up,

remained silent, and very often saw the sexual abuse of children taking
place. My experience in the religious life and priesthood leads me to
conclude that

almost no religious brother, sister, priest, or deacon is immune from the
knowledge of, participation in, or looking the other way from the sexual
abuse of

children.

4) Your report apparently ignores (again!) the ongoing needs of survivors.
I work with over 200 survivors of clergy sexual abuse. Many are not
healed, will not

be healed, and cannot access treatment because of unreliable or
non-existent policies and programs of dioceses. For example, one survivor
met privately

with a bishop who promised the survivor that he would finally get the
house he has wanted for his family and him. The bishop promised him a
substantial

settlement, separate from the "mass settlement" that was being negotiated.
When the survivor went to his "settlement meeting," he was told he was
part of

the mass settlement and that he was scheduled to receive a settlement much
lower than he was promised. Because he felt betrayed, this man's PTSD was

triggered, the pain returned, and he spent his entire settlement on drugs!

5) In New Hampshire at the beginning of December, clergy abuse survivor
Leeland Eisenberg held hostages at the campaign headquarters of Hillary
Clinton.

During the previous months, he phoned every psychiatrist in New Hampshire
looking for a therapist who would accept third-party payments from the

Archdiocese of Boston. None would accept the payments! So, Lee took to
drinking and drugging to help his head stop spinning, and ended up in
Hillary

Clinton's headquarters to bring attention to the state of mental health
care in his State.

Your report said nothing about the ongoing needs of survivors, such as
housing, food, mental health care, and a host of other needs. If you ask
some of us

who are "in the trenches," we will tell you what needs to be done.

While I am not confident that you will respond to this letter in any
meaningful way, it is my hope that "something will get through"
eventually, so effective

change can take place in the midst of the evil and corruption.

Sincerely,
Rev. Robert M. Hoatson, Ph.D.
Founder and President
CC: Members of the National Review Board
Teresa Kettelkamp, Director of the USCCB Office of Child and Youth
Protection
Members of the Bishops' Committee on Child and Youth Protection